Certification or College degrees? Was: RE: list problems?

Petr M. Swedock petr at MIT.EDU
Thu May 23 16:47:06 UTC 2002



 : : Vadim Antonov <avg at exigengroup.com>
 : 
 :  
 : > On Wed, 22 May 2002, Kristian P. Jackson wrote:
 : > 
 : >> Perhaps a bachelors in network
 : >> engineering is in order?
 : 
 : I'm afraid there's not enough stuff one has to know to sucessfully
 : "design" networks to fill more than one-semester course.

One should not design networks. Designing networks is not a
solitary activity. One should be part of a team that works
to design networks. That team should be made up of people
who know many and divers things. 

You are not far off the mark,  however: There's not enough stuff, 
not contained in other coursework, to fill more than one-semester 
course in networking.  That is just to say that 'networking' is 
not a fundamental discipline in the same way as math, or chemistry 
might be but is an amalgam of intersecting skills and disciplines 
that are easily found elsewhere.  The engineers I admire and respect
all combine analytical skills (math), understanding of the
physical layer (electrical engineering, physics), financial
and resource allocation (economics), building fitout (mechanical
engineering, architecture) and computers (those things that
sit at the nodes of the networks...) AND they are constantly
striving to better understand the relationships between all
those things.

None of the engineers I respect and admire, came by the depth
and breadth of their skill not by walking a linear path but 
rather by wandering hither and yon... cataloguing as they 
went. School made sense for many, less so for others... 

The pivotal advice I received was regarding a decision to
stay, or leave, the small college I was attending and to
get an engineering degree at a larger college. My physics
professor argued thusly: "You can get and engineering degree
and be an engineer, or you can get a physics degree and
be anything."  

Peace,

Petr

-- 
petr at mit.edu	http://web.mit.edu/petr  http://lids.mit.edu
____________________________________________________________
   You can design simply, or you can design for simplicity.
   The first requires a fear of complexity only. The second 
   requires an understanding of complexity. Choice is yours
------------------------------------------------------------         
                         
                          
		              



More information about the NANOG mailing list